• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

CFMC NWLC 20101021

on

  • 631 views

This is the fourth and final presentation for network weavers. Focus: network tools (network mapping and evaluation)

This is the fourth and final presentation for network weavers. Focus: network tools (network mapping and evaluation)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
631
Views on SlideShare
631
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Groups of 2-3 share for 5-6 min. Report out from volunteers back in large group
  • Everyone participates in networks. The study and practice of multi-stakeholder engagement, collaboration, and organizational development are also well-established disciplines that inform our understanding of networks. What’s different now is that a wave of new technologies—from conference calls and e-mails to blogs, wikis, tags, texts, and tweets— allow people to more easily visualize, communicate with, and act on existing personal and professional networks, and to forge strong connections with new ones. These tools make it possible to link with any number of people (irrespective of geographic distance), to access a greater diversity of perspectives, to accelerate the sharing of information, and to drastically reduce the costs of participation and coordination. That makes them well suited to facilitating progress on complex social and environmental challenges that require people and organizations to coordinate their efforts across traditional boundaries and sectors. [i ] [i] Scearce D, Kasper G, Grant H. Working Wikliy. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Summer 2010.
  • Are there any topics or issues you’d like to discuss or review?
  • Results: This question informs us of network cohesion. Responses indicate a genuine desire to form partnerships and work with other network members. This is an optimal outcome of the sharing and learning lifecycle phases. At the appropriate times, Network Weavers may capitalize on network cohesion by providing encouragement and guidance for productive network action. Note: 68% want to share information, 60% want to share experiences, 56% want to teach others, 50% want to contribute action ideas.
  • Fifth meeting, ongoing learning
  • Weavers establish measures of success for next 30 days…

CFMC NWLC 20101021 CFMC NWLC 20101021 Presentation Transcript

  • Social Network Support Project: Network Weaver Learning Community Network Tools: Fourth in a Series of Four Sessions Community Foundation for Monterey County October 21, 2010 Thank you June Holley of Network Weaving, Monitor Institute, and Packard Foundation
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  • Why Use Social Networks?
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  •  
  • Overall Training Goals
    • By the end of the four sessions, participants will
    • be inspired to work with a network mindset and to continue weaving and building networks
    • have a deeper understanding of network theory, as it applies to social networks, and characteristics of a healthy network
    • be able to recognize the qualities of network weavers/leaders; recognize and affirm individual weaver qualities and successes
    • understand network life cycles
    • appreciate the role of evaluating networks and learn how the network can help evaluate its own progress
    • have practiced applying weaver practices and shared their challenges and learnings with each other
    • have received an introduction to network mapping software
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  • A Few Helpful Definitions Core Monitor Institute Link Node Cluster Periphery Hub
  • How Networks Progress and Evolve Source: Valdis Krebs and June Holley, Building Smart Communities through Network Weaving 1. 2. 3. 4. Multi-Hub Small World Core Periphery Hub and Spoke Scattered Clusters
  • Value Participation Form Leadership Connection Capacity Learning & Adaptation
      • Clearly articulated give and get for participants
      • Delivers value/ outcomes to participants
      • Trust
      • Diversity
      • High engagement
      • Balance of top-down and bottom-up logic
      • Space for self-organized action
      • Embraces openness, transparency, decentralization
      • Shared leadership
      • Strategic use of social media
      • Ample shared space: on-line and in-person
      • Ability surface & tap network talent
      • Model for sustainability
      • Mechanisms for learning-capture
      • Ability to gather and act on feedback
    Governance
      • Representative of the network’s diversity
      • Transparent
    Helpful Sources: M. Kearns and K. Showalter; J. Holley and V. Krebs; P. Plastrik and M. Taylor; J. W. Skillern; C. Shirky Characteristics of Healthy Networks: Overview
  • Network Maps as an Evaluation Tool (Diversity, Resources from Periphery) Literacy: Future Potential Collab With whom would you like to collaborate with in the next six months on an adult literacy project? Salinas Monterey Peninsula Monterey County South County By geography served more than one area did not take survey
  • Network Maps as an Evaluation Tool (Value and Engagement) Environment: Future Content Which of these content areas might your organization add to its focus in the next 1-3 years? incomplete data Future Content watershed culture ocean and aquatic env water land none other
  • Network Maps as an Evaluation Tool (Diversity) Greenfield In which languages does your organization provide services? Spanish, Mixteco English, Spanish Spanish, Oaxacan + Organization Languages Other Spanish English, Spanish, Oaxacan
  • Network Maps as an Evaluation Tool (Safety and violence/gang prevention) Individuals working on safety and violence prevention issues appear to be very central to the overall network, are better networked with one another; and have a larger periphery 2010 2007
  • Network Maps as an Evaluation Tool (Health, Sexuality, and Teen Pregnancy Prevention) While fewer in numbers, in terms of primary interest, individuals working on health issues and teen pregnancy prevention are better connected in 2010 than in 2007. 2010 2007
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  • Research Questions
    • Could knowing how networks connect, share, and mobilization teach foundations how to be more effective sponsors of community change?
    • How might the impacts of social networks transform grant making and program development?
  • Research Questions
    • What is Assessed? What is Measured?
      • Operations: connectivity – nodes, links, clusters, and hubs depicted by mapping results
      • Network health: lifecycle phase
      • Impacts and Outcomes: successes and achievements
  • Evaluation Criteria Network Operations Repository Outcomes:  Capacity for Learning  Network Participation  Network Sustainability
    • Network Weavers:
    • Convener
    • Communication conduit
    • Knowledge generator
    • Information repositor
    Action Share Learn Sharing Outcomes:  Cohesion & Cooperation  Network Information Repository Learning Outcomes:  Information Utilization  Repository Content Increase quantity or quality  Knowledge flow Action flow Action Outcomes:  Influence on Community Change  Nonprofit Effectiveness  Synergistic Endeavors Reposit
  • Evaluation Criteria Sustainability Focus & Growth Productivity Sustainability Network Life Cycle Formation Focus Growth Decline or Renewal Creech and Ramji
  • Evaluation Criteria Formation Phase: Network Weavers act as leaders, educators, and strategists to effectively support the network Network members share with and learn from each other, establish relationships, but work independently. May gain productivity as a result of the information repository but not necessarily through joint activities Phase Characteristics
  • Evaluation Criteria Focus and Growth Phase: Network Weavers act as leader and facilitator Network members plan and work collaboratively with joint purpose and goals Phase Characteristics
  • Evaluation Criteria Productivity and Sustainability Phase: Network Weavers foster “collective leadership” Network members are group oriented, active, productive, achieve measurable successes Phase Characteristics
  • Evaluation Criteria Decline/Renewal Phase: Network Weaver s role is filled by successive leaders. Encourage, renew, remind Network members change, recombine, revise strategies, regenerate Phase Characteristics
  • Evaluation Methodology
    • Logic Modeling
    • Online Survey of Network Members
    • Analysis of Network and Aggregate Responses
    • Recommendations, Next Steps
    • Network Learning Community
    • Share with Foundation Community
  • Evaluation Methodology
    • Survey Pool : 11
    • Survey responses: 8
    • Response rate: 70%
    Environment
    • Survey Pool : 28
    • Survey responses: 22
    • Response rate: 79%
    Greenfield
    • Survey Pool: 27
    • Survey responses: 20
    • Response rate: 70%
    Literacy Network Survey April 2010 Network
  • 1. What do you want to do as a member of this group? Select all that apply. n = 50 16% 8 - Other 30% 15 Learn Learn how to reach influential people 50% 25 Action Influence or improve a service, system, or policy 14% 7 Learn Ask a question about a specific topic 72% 36 Share Share resources, funding, expenses with others 54% 27 Learn Learn how other organizations operate               56% 28 Action Improve my organization's practices Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • 2. What do you want to contribute to this group? Select all that apply. n = 50 6% 3 - Other 50% 25 Action My concerns the group can address 46% 23 Share My ideas for group collaboration 56% 28 Share Teach others about my organization 30% 15 Share Experiences in program administration or funding 60% 30 Share My experiences in program service delivery               68% 34 Share My knowledge, expertise, or program materials Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • 3. Who do you want to influence through this group? Select all that apply. n = 50 2% 1 - Other 18% 9 Action Consultants, vendors, contractors 68% 34 Action Consumers/potential consumers 62% 31 Action Funders 76% 38 Action Policy makers, elected officials, managers 60% 30 Action Others outside of the group               64% 32 Action Other group members Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options 0 25 50 75 100
  • 4. So far, what have you gained as a member of this group? Select all that apply. n = 50 12% 6 - Nothing has changed yet 36% 18 Learn More knowledge how to increase capacity 48% 24 Learn More knowledge of network benefits 62% 31 Learn Stronger connections to other members 20% 10 Action More access to influential people 54% 27 Learn More knowledge of valuable resources               84% 42 Learn More knowledge of local organizations Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options 0 25 50 75 100
  • 5. What would make it easier to be more active in this group? Select all that apply. n = 50 12% 6 - Other 22% 11 Share More reminders & ideas of how to participate 44% 22 Learn More examples of how to work together 44% 22 Learn More resources to help meet my goals 66% 33 Action Common concerns, priorities, tasks 32% 16 Action More face-to-face time               22% 11 Action More online group activities Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • 6. Are you aware of mutual concerns this group is working on? Select all that apply. n = 50 24% 12 Action I don’t know if any have been identified 10% 5 Action No, no specific concerns               66% 33 Action Yes, I know of one or more Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • 7. So far, how beneficial has network membership been to you/your organization? Select all that apply. n = 50 10% 5 - I’m not sure 6% 3 - Not Beneficial 38% 19 - Somewhat Beneficial               46% 23 - Beneficial Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • 8. In the future, how beneficial do you think this network group will be? Select all that apply. n = 50 8% 4 - I’m not sure 0% 0 - Will likely not be beneficial 36% 18 - Will be somewhat beneficial               54% 27 - Will be beneficial Respondents Selecting this Option Responses Network Function Answer Options
  • Questions about online communication for Literacy and Greenfield networks only: 9. In the past three months, how many times did you ask a question, announce an event, or provide a useful document to group members by email or on Google Groups? 43% - once or twice 10. How often do you visit the Google Group site? 43% - when I receive an email notification 11. How easy is it for you to post information to the Google Group site? 71% - never tried
  • Findings Getting from Here to Here
  • Findings “ If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people together to collect wood, and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  • Today’s Workshop
      • Reconnect; Discuss Reading and Your Network
      • Overview of First Three Sessions – Burning Questions?
      • Review Network Mapping Tool
      • Mapping Software Demonstration
      • Evaluating Networks
      • Working with a Network Mindset and Next Steps
  • Centralized Decentralized Note: These categories often overlap. Most of the examples fit in to multiple categories.
      • Nonprofit organizations ( without explicit network structure)
      • Membership organizations (Organizations with network component)
      • Nonprofits with explicit network strategy and structure
      • Coalition / Alliance (network of organizations)
      • Networks of networks
      • Ad hoc networks
    Monitor Institute. Developed from: Plastrik, Taylor, “Net Gains,” (2006); Anklam, “Net Work,” (2007); Krebs, Holley. “Building Smart Communities,” (2006).Source for Network Graphics: orgnet.com A Typology of Organizing Structures
  • What Do We Mean by “Network Mindset”?
      • Centralized
      • Firmly controlled
      • Planned
      • Proprietary
      • Transactional
      • One-way
      • communications
      • Decentralized
      • Loosely controlled
      • Emergent
      • Open, shared
      • Relational
      • Two-way
      • conversations
    Where are you? The answer will be different for different situations Monitor Institute Established Ways of Working Social Change with a Network Mindset
  • What might a network weaver’s job include ?
    • Introduce network concepts and mapping
    • Connecting to enhance the network
    • Move the network to action
    • Build network support structures
    • Help others become Network Weavers
    • What else?
    What are you all ready doing and what might you like to focus on?
  • Next Steps
    • For CFMC
    • For this group
    MAVRAC
  • Next Steps
    • Talk with others about a possible new project (e.g., implementation or advocacy)
    • Begin a network discussion (e.g., shared interest or priority, professional development topic, invite people in from periphery)
    • Nurture : Share what you’ve learned here with another; build allies and weavers
    • Bridge : Share what you’ve learned here and facilitate trust; build relationships
    • Become more transparent and deliberate about sharing information with stakeholders
  • High-impact nonprofits collaborate rather than compete with their peers. They achieve their collective goals by sharing resources and empowering others. -Crutchfield and McLeod-Grant, Forces For Good A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. -Lao-tzu